masseffectfandomcom-20200222-history
Template talk:Cost
Deletion Proposal This template only serve as decoration for text that could be explicitly changed inside the one article page itself. Even if such use of coloring is required, the name of the template should be more general in order to apply to a more wide array of articles. --silverstrike 10:27, July 3, 2011 (UTC) :I don't see a problem with keeping it, but I understand your reasoning. I'll support deletion on the condition that you (or another go-getter) take on the unenviable task of swapping out the template for the coloring code in the Research article by the time this discussion closes, so that when this template is deleted, it won't mess up the article. Otherwise, I'll oppose deletion. -- Commdor (Talk) 01:23, July 4, 2011 (UTC) ::Do you see any other use for that inline styling? Like the template, it could remain and continue to be useful (with the template name change). If it's decided that the template needs to go, I have problem altering the research article myself. --silverstrike 07:54, July 4, 2011 (UTC) :::Strongly oppose deletion. Templates like this prevent a lot of code in articles that can cause people who don't know what it is, to delete/modify it, and therefore cause a problem. Since this is up for deletion, and I noticed the template isn't, then this isn't consistent with deletions as all five are used and all either need to go or stay. Lancer1289 16:36, July 5, 2011 (UTC) ::::Limiting the number of templates only serve to make things clear. I've been active (on and off) in this wiki for some time now, and although I mainly work on templates, I still have trouble distinguishing between them and know what template I should use when editing an article or discussing something on talk pages. ::::I may have been too quick to dismiss those five templates without thinking through about other implementation, but there are better ways to handle usage of templates - for example: the paragon and renegade templates could be merged into one template with one parameter pass, does this complicate the usage? I think knowing that we have a template called "cost" is unlikely for new contributors. --silverstrike 17:53, July 5, 2011 (UTC) :::::So let's make things more complicated then? To me, that doesn't make any sense as under that proposal they would have to put more things into the article, and have to know the specifics of it, that is just unnecessary when we already have a system that works well. Not to mention it would cause issues as we'd be constantly fixing them. Templates are usually created with a purpose and deleting them just because they are only used on one page, yet serve a purpose, doesn't make sense to me one bit. Combining things into one template only serves to complicate the matter, rather you have in these cases, specific templates that have a specific purpose and they aren't hard to understand as their name states their function. Again I state that if we delete this one, then all five, including the note template must be deleted and then we'd have to go around to how many different articles to remove that? The system we have now is working and let's not complicate the issue. Lancer1289 18:13, July 5, 2011 (UTC) The template has not been removed from the Research article, so I oppose deletion per my above comment. -- Commdor (Talk) 05:27, July 11, 2011 (UTC) The deletion proposal fails 2-1. The template stays. -- Commdor (Talk) 05:27, July 11, 2011 (UTC)